Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Trichotomy

Expand Messages
  • ErnstStrohregenmantelrad
    >>>Docetism. There is a common misunderstanding that all Gnosticism was docetic, it wasn t. There are Adoptionist views expressed in the Nag Hammadi.
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 6, 2001
      >>>Docetism. There is a common
      misunderstanding that all Gnosticism was docetic, it wasn't. There
      are Adoptionist views expressed in the Nag Hammadi.
      It is also important to note that Gnosticism draws a
      very distinct line between history and the more
      important allegory, this means that Docetism and
      Adoptionism are not even necessarily at odds (and in fact
      Philip seems to imply the truth of both
      possibilites.<<<<br><br>This is true up to a certain point. I agree the
      equating Docetism with Gnosticism is a premature view. I
      think Syrian Christianity which purposed to be Gnostic
      in origin by some scholar was Adoptnist. This brings
      up my theory that perhaps Gnosticism/Christianity is
      configuration of Greek which has more or less docetic element
      and Jewish which has more or less adaptist element.
      It is worth nothing that two competing schoolsof
      Christian theolgy were Alexandria and Antioch. Alexandrian
      deals more with (Neo-)Platonic aspect hense allelogical
      interpretation where as Antioch deals more with Aristolinan
      aspect hense more literal interpretation. It is
      fascinating to accert that respected center also had inherent
      docetism (Alexandera with it's Greek philosophy:
      Platonism, Stoic and Pythagorian plus the nexus of
      Hermetism) and Adaptionalism (Antioch with Syriac Tradition
      and prossible the Jewish-Christian groups such as
      Ebionites who were diffnitely adaptionlists and well as so
      called Messianic movement such as
      Simonians).<br><br>Like what I discussed in Paulician there is possiblity
      that extreme Iconasts might tend to beome dualists and
      whether that group is adoptionists at the beginning won't
      matter. In the way Nicea is really 'orthodox' trying
      recoincile the both adoptionalist (Jewish) and docetic
      (Greek) roots of Gnosticism producing the formula that is
      of Christianty.<br><br>>>>The simple
      difficulty then lies in the fact that they don't also exist
      in Gnosticism. They *do* however exist in other late
      antiquities "heresies"... for instance Four Square
      Pentecostals look strikingly similar to Montanism, and thus,
      IMHO would be better equated as a recurance of this
      group than Gnosticism.<<<<br><br>As I stated
      earlier I do view Pentalcoastalism as Neo-Montanism. But
      as to the clear cut demarkation of heretical groups
      could be problamatic. The one area which no attention
      has been researched is the relationship between
      Montanism and Gnosticism. To this I came across intersting
      article in _Harvard Theological Review_. The article is
      titled "What did the Montanists Read?" by Nicola Denzey
      (sorry I didn't get the date. but it is very recent in
      2001). The article put the question of the relationship
      between Montanism and Gnosticsm by suggesting that
      Montanists might included some scriptures that was found in
      Nag Hammadi namely _Thunder: Perfect Mind_ (NHC VI,
      2) and _Trimorphic Potennoia_ (NHC XIII, 1). Of
      course the author uses the argument of Michael Willians
      as to question the labling of the term "Gnostic" but
      I think it is a start. I would more like to see the
      connection in the light of CMC of Mani as well. Montanist
      have many thing in common with Gnostics at least in
      participation of both sexes and above all in the Judaic
      foundation (especially in "Sethian"-note I put it in the
      quotes)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.